Young People's Multiple Risk Behaviour An Assets Approach To The Role Of Family, School & Community Professor Fiona Brooks, Jo Magnusson, Neil Spencer,

Young People's Multiple Risk

Behaviour

An Assets Approach To The Role Of

Family, School & Community

Professor Fiona Brooks, Jo Magnusson, Neil Spencer, Antony Morgan

CRIPACCUniversity of Hertfordshire www.hbscengland.com

What is HBSC?

Unique international study that gathers data from young people about their health and wellbeing

Purpose to increase knowledge and understanding of adolescent health in relation to their social and developmental context

 HBSC surveys conducted every 4 years in member countries Standard international questionnaire & survey method

plus optional question packages

 Data collected on 11,13 and 15 year olds in 43 member countries across Europe and North America.

MeasuresMeasures in HBSCMeasures in HBSC

Includes measures on physical, emotional and social health and well-being

Measures comprehensive range of behaviours both risk and promote health

Places health and behaviour of young people in social and developmental context

Health Related Behaviours

Health and Well-being

Family Life

School

Peers and Community

Premise

•Adolescence perceived as period of ‘risk taking’ – BUT Risk behaviours often looked at in isolation

•Certain amount of risk taking among young people is ‘normal’

•Frequent involvement in multiple risk behaviours may be problematic

•Need to understand what assets operate to protect against young people getting involved in multiple risk behaviours 

Support (family relationships, caring school and neighbourhood)

Empowerment (community values youth, young people seen as resources)

Constructive use of time (participation in clubs and associations)

Commitment to learning (achievement motivation)

Positive values (caring and responsible to others)

Social competencies (cultural competence, peaceful conflict resolution

Positive identity (self esteem

BUT…. REPRESENT A STARTING POINT….

40 Development Assets (Scales, 2001)

• Are some assets (protective factors) more important than others? - keystone

• What are the cumulative effects of multiple assets on young people's mental and physical well being?

• What are the processes that lead to assets having an impact ?

• How do different social and cultural contexts impact on the benefits of these assets?– UK context

• Are some assets more important for different groups?

Modelling Assets Using HBSC

Multiple substance use among 15 year olds

Assets

Four categories of assets were investigated:1. sense of belonging (associated with family

(FSB), school (SSB) and neighbourhood (NSB))

2. autonomy (personal autonomy in relation to family (PAF), and peers (PAP), and student autonomy in relation to school (SAS)

3. social networking (associated with neighbourhood (NSN))

4. social support (associated with family communication with father (FCF), family communication with mother (FCM), teachers (TSS) and peers (PSS))

Assets Modelling

Questions used to assess risk

Score 0 Score 1 Score 2

Have you ever had so much alcohol that you

were really drunk?

No Yes,

once

More than

once

On how many occasions (if any) have you drunk

alcohol in the last 30 days?

None One or

two

More than

two

On how many occasions (if any) have you

smoked cigarettes in the last 30 days?

None One or

two

More than

two

On how many occasions (if any) have you taken

cannabis (sometimes called pot, dope or weed)

in the last 12 months?

None One or

two

More than

two

The last time you had sexual intercourse, did

you or your partner use a condom?

Have never

had sexual

intercourse

Yes No

• 1087 students provided information on all the risk behaviour variables

• 32% no risk category

• 50% moderate or some risk (1-5)

• 18 % high risk (score 6-10)

Risk Behaviour Index

• Personal autonomy in relation to family– Lower personal autonomy associated with lower risk

• School sense of belonging. – High school sense of belonging associated with lower risk

• Neighbourhood sense of belonging– Medium or high neighbourhood sense of belonging

associated with lower risk

Effects retained in the model

• School Social Support (via teachers) (TSS), and Gender– Girls had lower risk than boys when TSS was high

• School Social Support (via teachers) (TSS), and Family Sense of belonging (FSB),– High levels of TSS was associated with less risk than medium

TSS, but low levels of TSS was associated with greater risk only when FSB was also low.

Interaction effects

• How parental regulation of adolescent autonomy and negotiation over leisure operates as a protective mechanism against multiple and high frequency risk behaviours.

• family affluence not retained in the model adds weight to the need to understand health related risk taking in adolescence as determined by a broad range of contextual factors.

Family Findings Illustrate

• Findings indicate the importance of adults other than parents, as protective assets for the health and wellbeing of young people, especially in relation to the significance of having a personal connection to a teacher when parental connectivity may be low.

School

• considered how informal aspects of the local environment have significance for young people.

• Illustrates significance of growing up in a community with strong cohesion in which adolescents feel a positive sense of belonging.

• Young people’s feelings of safety in the out of home setting, having a place in their community and perceiving the wider adult community as supportive, - important protective function

Community

Multiple substance use among 15 year olds

Protective Factors/Assets – most vulnerable

1. Parental participation in how spend free time

2. Teacher Connectedness

3. Feeling safe in community and having friendly neighbourhood

• Core domains of social capital operate as protective assets – in terms of frequency and clustering of high risk behaviours.

• Levels of autonomy within the family and teacher support were important predictors of adolescent health related behaviours.

• A positive sense of community cohesion and belonging is a significant protective asset

• Low teacher connectedness becomes a significant risk factor when family control over autonomy was also low.

• No relationship was found between involvement in multiple substance use over the last 30 days and family affluence (FAS).

Main Findings

Key issues

Highlights key aspects of physical health and family, school and community life that may be most significant in terms of contributing to protecting against multiple risk behaviours

• Feeling safe and comfortable in community environments

• Parental Monitoring

•more important than family activities and communication for this aspect of adolescent well-being NOT others

•Protective aspects of teacher connectedness

Peers less important as a protective asset than might be anticipated

Thank-you

Paper: Brooks, F., Magnusson, J., Spencer, N. & Morgan, A. (2012) Adolescent Multiple Risk Behaviour: An Assets Approach

To The Role Of Family, School And Community Journal Of Public Health, 34 48-56.

Patterns across the risk index for PAF, SSB and NSB

No risk

Score 0

Some risk

Score 1-5

High risk

Score 6-10

Personal autonomy in relation to family

(PAF)

Low 44% 37% 19%

Medium 28% 56% 16%

High 18% 58% 24%

School sense of belonging (SSB)

Low 17% 58% 25%

Medium 21% 54% 25%

High 29% 56% 15%

Neighbourhood sense of belonging (NSB)

Low 14% 43% 43%

Medium 25% 54% 21%

High 26% 58% 17%

Effects retained in the model

Patterns across risk index for interaction between FSB and TSS

No risk

Score 0

Some risk

Score 1-5

High risk

Score 6-10

FSB TSS

Low Low 7% 9% 84%

Medium 18% 53% 29%

High 25% 56% 20%

Medium Low 17% 51% 32%

Medium 20% 55% 26%

High 25% 60% 15%

High Low 26% 74% 0%

Medium 23% 59% 17%

High 37% 53% 10%

Assets Patterns Across the Risk Index